Hacker News Reader

Comment by oarsinsync | Hacker News Reader

Is there a reason why I'd want to use Broadcast Box instead of mediamtx, which features RTMP, RTSP, WebRTC/WHIP, and (LL)HLS in a single small binary?

View on HN

mediamtx is a great project! Use w/e works best for your use case. I just encourage people to use.

* Free Software

* Project is operated/managed by individuals

* Use Open Standards/Protocols

I think this is a highly underrated comment. It seems today, people wont create for free any more, just for the joy of creating and distributing some thing you care about. It's always please donate x to y. Or subscribe to get access to premium content.

Sorry for hijacking your comment :)

Economy is shit, what do you expect. Very few humans have the financial luxury to release free software and not try to monetize it at all.

this seems like a reasonable comment on its face, but then it reads selfishly. why should a developer donate time when a house isn’t donated to that programmer?

> mediamtx is a great project! Use w/e works best for your use case.

I agree, I'm just struggling to differentiate what BB offers that MMTX does not, so I can identify if there's a USP. If it's a passion project to scratch a personal itch, that's also great!

Also, can you share your latency measuring methodology?

I think Broadcast Box may have implemented WHIP/WHEP before MediaMTX so it tends to be one of the first results when looking up a WHIP-capable server. Plus it has a public instance so if you want to test WHIP real quick, it's pretty easy to just point OBS somewhere instead.

MediaMTX used to be "rtsp-simple-server" which really undersold what it was capable of (even back then it could ingest RTMP and output HLS and WebRTC).

Overall I think MediaMTX has more features and can do everything that Broadcast Box can.

I didn't know this existed, so thanks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com